Path: shell.portal.com!shell.portal.com!not-for-mail From: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (lorax) Newsgroups: alt.pagan,alt.satanism,alt.religion.all-worlds,alt.religion.wicca,talk.religion.misc Subject: X-Pagans, CAW and the GMC (was Re: Satanist/NeoPagan War) Date: 7 Jul 1996 13:11:34 -0700 Organization: Portal Communications (shell) Lines: 235 Sender: tyagi@shell.portal.com Message-ID: <4rp5lm$op@jobe.shell.portal.com> References: <4rj0rg$u47@insosf1.netins.net> Reply-To: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (lorax) NNTP-Posting-Host: jobe.shell.portal.com Xref: shell.portal.com alt.pagan:165498 alt.satanism:46659 alt.religion.all-worlds:8300 alt.religion.wicca:33257 talk.religion.misc:228333 kaliyuga 49960707 AA1 [newsgroup header redefined, y'all may wish to be more respectful of the alt.magick newsgroup, it gets enough noise] Thomas Hrouda wrote: |>|FYI: One of the few things resolved on the thread is to decide that |>|the terms PAGAN and NEOPAGAN do not mean the same thing. some people do mean the same thing by them. Xina : |Pagan = pre christian religion including hinduism, egyptian, celtic, |asatru, native american, etc etc etc as I could have said to THrouda, terms aren't dead gravestones fixed with permaglue. in living languages they are usually changed over time, due to cultural and political influences, sometimes quite intentionally (to which the Great Martyrdom Cult usually responds and it is now (again?) beginning to consciously return the favor through "Satanism"). 'Pagan' as an other-identifier has meant many things over the years, including its apparent usage as a Roman Christian slander against the uncivilized 'backwoods folk'/'hicks'/'bumpkins', a delineation on the order of 'nonjudeochristian' (compare this with the Hebrew 'goyim', which also has had such variation of meaning). thus we must distinguish (note, JUST LIKE "SATANIST") who it is that is speaking: someone trying to distinguish themselves from those who are categorized as "pagan", or someone who is identifying *as* "pagan" (often "a" and modernly capitalized, which implies, I think its "Neo" status); as an other-identity or self-identity. as an other-identity, "pagan" has more often meant 'nonjudeochristian'. as a self-identity, "pagan" has also often meant this, though by people who may not have understood either that the term originated with the traditions from which they distinguished themselves or what their relationship may be, religiously, with other religious (historically or contemporaneous). |Neo-Pagan = the proprietary term (supposedly) made up by Oberon/Otter |Zell in the 1960's as a descriptive term for the spiritual 'movement' of |folks that found a home in Wicca, and other traditions that have been |a)made up for the most part from 1945 (Gerald Gardner, etc.)to the present |day, b) borrows from many different traditions of tradional (historic) |Paganism and reworks it into something that the individual adherents or |group of adherents finds to be a workable spiritual alternative or Path. |It can (but does not always) include those of traditional Paganism. I'm unsure that the conglomerate which arises around X-Pagan can be used in an sort of *proprietary* sense, since it was a descriptive, but *Neo-Pagan* does appear to have arisen with the then Otter G'Zell (now apparently Oberon G'Zell, and I'd respect that name-change). I remember reading of his reminiscences in various publications, including 'Green Egg' and Adler's _Drawing Down the Moon_ (albeit I read the first edition -- I never attempted to read through the subsequent revision and amplification, but it is very lovely). as part of a reflection on what I'm calling this conglomerate term (Pagan, Neo-Pagan, Neopagan, various analytic categories by Bonewits and others, such as 'Paleopagan', which can be found in _Real Magic_, I'm sure), I looked to the Beltane 1988, Vol. XXI, No. 81 'Green Egg' (it says "The Next Generation" and "PREMIERE COLLECTOR'S ISSUE!"). in it, Otter makes clear that in the late 60's (1968) the Church of all Worlds (CAW) received its 501(C)(3) rating from the US govt, and that: At that time CAW was intimately involved with Feraferia, the only other group we had found to embrace the designation "Pagan." (p. 2, 'An Editorial History: 'It was 20 Years Ago Today"', by Otter G'Zell) ___________________________________________________________ from the beginning (whenever that may have been and whoever may have developed the terminology) the terms "Pagan" (usually capitalized) and "Neo-Pagan" (often double-capitalized) have been utilized in the same publications, and I suspect that the prependation was in part at least through feeling a disconnection from pre-Christian tradition (whether or not the speaker presumed that the modern resurgence/revival resembled that of those indigenous religious). thus we see that there has often been a conflation or combination of the two, some utilizing it merely to self-identify, some doing so as a statement of connection with the pre-Christian religious ("Pagan") and perhaps some arguing that a clean break should be made ("Neo-..."; due to the at times 'barbaric' practices of pre-Christians!). to attempt now to distinguish any more than this is somewhat useless, for it only enters into the political and historical debate as to 'what is true' about the history and the cultural continuity. these issues are constantly debated among Neopagans. that said, I feel the variation 'Neopagan' is effectively utilized in *contrast* to 'Neo-Pagan', which is the CAW's particular *thrust* of Neopaganism and suffers from conflation here. I'm not sure if this is what the CAW claims, but what I see within the Church of All Worlds is far more directed and specialized than in the broader 'movement' to which Otter referred, and I hope that that focus is not lost (ecocentric, restructuring of relationship to Gaia, etc.). ---------------------- legends and religion as regards *Satanism* and within that same publication appears: Otter G'Zell founded and incorporated the Church of All Worlds in 1967, which became the first Neo-Pagan church to obtain full Federal recognition in the US. First to apply the term "Pagan" to the newly emerging Earth Religions of the 1960's and through his editorship of the _Green Egg_ (1968-1975), Otter was instrumental in the coalescence of the Neo-Pagan movement. In 1970, Otter formulated and published the thealogy of deep ecology which has become known as The Gaea Hypothesis. With his wife and soulmate, Morning Glory, he founded the Ecosophical Research Association [ERA], whose projects have included raising Unicorns, chasing Mermaids, and exploring the Underworld. (p. 4, accompanying Zell's 'THEAGENESIS...' essay, same issue) _________________________________________________________ now what intrigues me about this text is how blatant it is a co-option of the establishment scientific language surrounding one's relation to experience and nature, 'facts' and mythology. Otter refers to "Unicorns", and yet his meaning is not the very common idea in tales about majestic horses with single horns sprouting from their heads. they have a *goat* (maybe other animals by now) which was specifically influenced to grow such a single horn as I understand it. the deception could not be more plain (though not severe, as there are pictures of a goat with a single horn within many of their publications; 'Lancelot' if memory serves). and the reference to "Mermaids" is explained within the publication itself by Tom Williams (a nice man I've met a time or two) who has very many wonderful things to say about this same issue which I think also relate to any study of Satanism: In line with the premise of the ERA that human archetypes are often reflected in material reality, and that investi- gation of these archetypes in their mythic and material manifestations can teach us much about ourselves and the being of which we are a part, members of the ERA took up the challenge of a real, live mermaid-like creature.... ...beyond the cryptozoological interest, which was real enough, was the further investigation of an archetype and its connection with the human experience of the Home.... ----------------------------------------------------- from 'AMARGI: Interdisciplinary Journal of the ERA', an insert between pp. 14-5 of the publication mentioned above, and within an article 'Cryptozoology/Tailing the Mermaid: A Merry Chase to the Depths of Myth', p.1 __________________________________________________________ I contend that in the study of Satanism we must exercise the exact same perspicacity, winnowing out the fables from the facts, as was *wonderfully* done within this article, following on a living being called the 'dugong' ands its appearance to the researchers. here is how the article concluded: One of the lingering questions is how the myths of merfolk can arise and persist in the face of the obvious reality of the dugong.... There is apparently some kind of belief system at work whose nature transcends the strict discipline of zoology and spills over into the realm of anthropology and psychology.... ...whatever the original source of the stories, they appear to persist as some sort of self-perpetuating male fantasy. Such a fantasy could persist if there were just enough doubt in one's mind about the nature and existence of the animal that he was not confident enough to dismiss out of hand someone else's account of seeing it. (Just maybe it is real.) Not being scoffed at would imply a sort of tacit acceptance of veracity. Then having encountered the likai [merfolk] would take on a kind of status in the group and the pressure would be on to gain status by recounting one's own encounter, which could not be summarily discounted by the others, who were either liars in their own right, afraid of being found out, or inclined to accept the possibility that the other fellow has seen the likai, or both. Thus, nobody could debunk the legend and it would continue to grow. (Ibid, p. 4.) ____________________________________________________________ Williams goes on to speculate about what other sort of legends might have similar bases in the natural world, blown out of proportion by rumormongering and status-seeking legend-weavers (my own interpretation). now what I'd like to ask is why this *same* thing couldn't happen with human beings, rather than just nonhuman animals *purported* to have human characteristics such as the likai/merfolk and the sirens which Williams mentions later on. moreover, given that these kinds of legends perpetuate and are used for *political purposes*, it is easy to see how, especially amongst a rather ignorant and superstitious people, it could become a horrible nightmare (Inquisition anyone?). my own investigations surrounding witchcraft (generic) and Satanism (in all its various forms) indicate that this is precisely what has been happening, with occasional *intentional* adoptions of these legends into personal mythology and practice, drawing not only from the establishment which propagandizes them but also any pre-existent symbols or rites or names which which might be associated with said legends (old godnames are peppered throughout the lists of 'demons', for example). over hundreds of years it is easy to see this principle affecting vast swathes of historical religious development, and this ties directly into my own postulations about the Great Martyrdom Cult, since it surfaces in *response* to these developing legends, mimicking, manifesting and playing them out before the horrified believers who have swallowed the propaganda hook, line and sinker. how far this goes I am not yet sure, but I find it reassuring that I can make the point in terms which the Church of All Worlds members should be able to assimilate through the language of its eldest membership within the ERA -- an organization and idea which I find inspiring. may those of CAW never thirst, lorax of the evul wikkhunz (<-- note the legendary last two words, mispelt) tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com ^^^^ ^^^^^(note these also, of similar quality) -----------------------------------------------------------